Professional Documents
Culture Documents
GHD Aecom Dredging Reclamation - Ground Improvement
GHD Aecom Dredging Reclamation - Ground Improvement
Improvement
In undertaking this task, Infrastructure Victoria reviewed work that was completed as part of
the Port of Hastings development project before it was cancelled in 2014. This document
forms part of the initial work undertaken for the proposed port development at Hastings.
Infrastructure Victoria considers that much of the previous Hastings work, although
preliminary in nature, is relevant and suitable for informing a strategic assessment.
Therefore, Infrastructure Victoria has made the reports previously commissioned for the
development project part of the evidence base on which Infrastructure Victoria will use in
providing the Minister with advice.
The opinions, conclusions and any recommendations in this document are based on
conditions encountered and information reviewed at the date of preparation of the document
and for the purposes of the Port of Hastings Development Project.
Infrastructure Victoria and its consultants have used the information contained in these
reports as an input but have not wholly relied on all the information presented in these
reports.
DRAFT
The AECOM + GHD Joint Venture in Australia and New Zealand are certified to the latest version of ISO9001, ISO14001, AS/NZS4801 and
OHSAS18001.
© AECOM + GHD Joint Venture. All rights reserved.
This Report has been prepared by the AECOM + GHD Joint Venture for the Port of Hastings Development Authority and may only be used
and relied on by the Port of Hastings Development Authority for the purpose agreed between the AECOM + GHD Joint Venture and the
Port of Hastings Development Authority as set out in this Report.
The AECOM + GHD Joint Venture otherwise disclaims responsibility to any person other than the Port of Hastings Development Authority
arising in connection with this Report. The AECOM + GHD Joint Venture also excludes implied warranties and conditions, to the extent
legally permissible.
The services undertaken by the AECOM + GHD Joint Venture in connection with preparing this Report were limited to those specifically
detailed in the Report and are subject to the scope limitations set out in the Report.
The opinions, conclusions and any recommendations in this Report are based on conditions encountered and information reviewed at the
date of preparation of the Report. The AECOM + GHD Joint Venture has no responsibility or obligation to update this Report to account for
events or changes occurring subsequent to the date that the Report was prepared.
The opinions, conclusions and any recommendations in this Report are based on assumptions made by the AECOM + GHD Joint Venture
described in this Report. The AECOM + GHD Joint Venture disclaims liability arising from any of the assumptions being incorrect.
Quality Information
Project Port of Hastings Development Project – Design and Engineering
Ref AGH-CEPO-EG-REP-0018
Date 27-Feb-15
Revision History
Authorised
Revision
Revision Details
Date
Name/Position Signature
1.0 Introduction
1.1 Background
The Port of Hastings Development Authority was set up by the Government of Victoria in 2012 to investigate
the feasibility of establishing a container terminal at Hastings. This terminal will provide additional capacity to
the Port of Melbourne and will also be able to handle larger ships that are unable to access the Port of
Melbourne.
Figure 1-1 Total dredged materials management and ground improvement flow diagram (Haskoning, 2015)
Ground conditions in the Port Area in the zone of likely dredging, reclamation, and ground improvement
typically comprise Quaternary marine deposits below seabed, overlying Baxter Formation, which in turn
overlies Sherwood Formation. These units are briefly described below, and selected cross sections are
attached.
There is also an area of previous reclamation (known as the Old Tyabb reclamation) underlain by Quaternary
marine deposits and Baxter and Sherwood Formations, which will also require ground improvement and is
briefly described below.
Quaternary marine deposits
Materials encountered from seabed comprised a surficial layer of low strength Quaternary marine deposits
typically very loose and loose carbonate and siliceous sand, soft and very soft clay, silty clay, and sandy silt. The
thickness of these weak materials is generally around 0.5 to 3 m, with the greatest thicknesses being up to 6 m
depth in the area north of the BlueScope Steel jetty; and around 3 to 4 m between the BlueScope Steel jetty
and the Long Island Point liquid berth, in the area immediately offshore from the inter-tidal zone with seabed
levels of around -1.0 mCD. There is also a zone of deeper Quaternary deposits in the northern part of the port
area in water depths ranging from around -1 mCD to -8mCD. Moving further offshore the depths of these
surficial deposits are typically less than 0.5 m. A contour plan showing the depth of very soft to soft and very
loose to loose deposits from seabed is given in Figure 3-2. Borehole locations are also shown on Figure 3-2. It
is noted that boreholes have been located on a widely spaced grid of approximately 500m in the Port Area and
were aimed at providing general site coverage.
Figure 3-2 - Port Area – Depth in metres of very soft to soft and very loose to loose seabed deposits
Baxter Formation
Port of Hastings Container Expansion – Design & Engineering
Dredging and Reclamation – Ground Improvement
27-Feb-15 7
DRAFT
The Baxter Formation was encountered below Quaternary deposits to depths of around 10 to 20 m below
seabed. The elevation of the base of the Baxter Formation is around -20 to -25 mCD in the furthest offshore
boreholes and at around -10 mCD in the boreholes in the intertidal and shallow water areas
The Baxter Formation includes variably interbedded silty sand, silty clay, clayey sand, sandy clay, sand, clayey
silt and clay materials with the predominant material types being clayey sand, sandy clay, silty sand and silty
clay. These materials are commonly grey mottled red and orange brown, pale grey, dark grey and brown and
locally contain gravel, iron cementation, and brown coal or carbonaceous material. This unit is typically
relatively competent comprising clay and silt materials of stiff to very stiff consistency and dense to medium
dense sand materials. However zones of weaker material are also present and comprising very loose and loose
sand and soft and firm clay (notably in 2009 BH06 to around RL -25 mCD). Clay materials are typically medium
to high plasticity and silts are typically of low plasticity. Sands are typically siliceous, fine to medium grained
and sub-rounded to sub-angular.
By inspection of borehole logs there does not appear to be any significant lateral continuity of material types
between adjacent boreholes which are at 500 m centres. Material type also repeatedly changes with depth
with the typical thicknesses of material beds in individual boreholes ranging from one to five metres.
Sherwood Formation
The Baxter Formation in the Port Area overlies the Sherwood Formation which is present over a depth range
from 6-50 m (-5 to -62 mCD). The Sherwood formation is typically present below -15 mCD.
Sherwood Formation is typically relatively competent and comprises orange brown, brown, grey brown, grey,
dark grey, green-grey and olive sand, silty sand, silt, sandy silt, silty clay and clayey silt, with local fine to
medium carbonate shells and shell fragments. Silty sands and sands are typically fine or fine-medium grained,
sub-angular or sub-rounded and of medium dense to very dense consistency. Sands are typically siliceous but
also include carbonate and calcareous sand. Sandy silt, silt, silty clay and clayey silt are typically of stiff to hard
consistency but also include zones of softer material. Clay and silt materials were typically of low to medium
plasticity with some high plasticity material encountered.
This unit appears to be more consistent in terms of vertical variation compared to the overlying Baxter
Formation, but there does not appear to be any significant lateral consistency of strata between adjacent
boreholes.
This unit includes cemented materials occurring below the Baxter Formation, and towards the base of the unit.
The degree of cementation ranges from weakly cemented to well cemented and includes:
pockets of weakly to well cemented materials
weakly cemented silt beds (carbonate cementing)
cemented sand
cemented shell fragments
gravel size cemented/mudstone fragments
weakly cemented sand nodules
zones of moderately cemented silty sand
occasional weakly cemented bands (within silty sand).
Old Tyabb Reclamation
The soil sequence encountered in the existing reclamation area between Long Island Point and the BlueScope
wharf, which was reclaimed to an RL of around +4.5 mAHD in the early 1970s, generally comprises a variable
thickness of fill, overlying a limited thickness of very soft to firm clay and very loose to loose sand, overlying
more competent stiff clay and medium dense to very dense sand deposits of the Baxter Formation.
The fill thickness varied between 1.3m and 4.0m and generally comprised a mixture of sand and clay, which in
places was observed to include cobble sized lumps of clay in a sand/sandy clay matrix. The basal fill materials
more typically comprised very loose to medium dense sand and soft to firm sandy silt/ clay. The cobble sized
lumps of clay are interpreted as being remnant “balling” of material from cutter suction dredge operations.
Natural soil materials underlying the fill were typically dark grey to black very loose and loose clayey/silty sand
and very soft to firm silts and clays, between 0.9m to 2.5m thick. Soils were noted to contain organic matter,
shells and have an organic odour. These materials were inferred to be Quaternary marine lagoon/ swamp
deposits, which were left in place beneath the reclamation fill. There was no evidence that these deposits are
inter-mixed with the fill materials as a result of the reclamation process.
The total combined thickness of the fills and the underlying low strength marine deposits ranged between 3
and 7 m depth. Groundwater was encountered within the reclamation fill at 1.6 to 2.4 m below ground level.
Port of Hastings Development Project – ‘Dredged Materials Management Ground Treatment Options’ –
dated February 2015 – Haskoning Australia
4.2 Reclamation
Some port development options may include reclamation. The final reclamation footprint is unknown and will
depend on the overall configuration of the port, position of the wharf line and the design dredge depth.
It is assumed that the overall reclamation footprint will include discrete reclamation areas which will support
staged expansion of the port. Dredged material for reclamation will need to be placed in areas contained within
bund walls. The bund walls would need to be designed to i) retain the slurry-like output from dredging with a
CSD in the type of material to be encountered, ii) protect the reclamation from erosion and wave attack, and iii)
retain and manage the quality of tail water from the dredged material by forming settling ponds. The bund
walls will need to be constructed prior to the commencement of reclamation works. Dredged materials would
likely be unsuitable for bund wall construction due to their fine grained nature, the high fines content of sandy
soils present, and the difficulty associated with selectively dredging suitable materials. It is therefore most likely
that bund walls will have to be constructed using imported granular fill or other suitable materials.
Alternatively temporary or permanent structures such as sheet pile walls or permanent wharf structures such
as bulkhead walls could be investigated in-lieu of external bund walls.
Soft ground under bund walls will most likely need to be excavated and replaced with suitable fill prior to bund
construction. Quaternary deposits comprising sandy materials and the top of the Baxter Formation are
expected to provide a suitable foundation for construction of bund walls. Since the existing seabed has a
variable thickness of very soft marine clays, it is anticipated that difficulties would be experienced when placing
reclamation fill on such materials without displacement or bearing failure of the low strength soils. In view of
this, and so as to avoid entrapment of displaced very soft soils beneath and within the reclamation fill, prior
removal of these materials by dredging could be considered, or alternatively materials displaced by mud
waving during the filling process could be removed as part of the reclamation materials management process.
Given the high percentage of fines in the dredged materials it is expected that materials dredged using CSD
techniques fines will tend to segregate during the deposition process, and management of dredged materials
will need to avoid encapsulating flocculated fines and slurry into the main reclamation fill i.e. this will require a
methodology which promotes segregation of the unsuitable and suitable fractions of the material. Where
placement is under water, a smaller CSD may be used to pump segregated fines or displaced very soft muds to
a settling pond outside the main reclamation.
Dependent on the type and location of proposed wharf structures and perimeter seawalls, the presence of
weaker layers within the Baxter Formation that may impact on perimeter stability would need to be
considered. If lower strength soils are present that could impact on the stability of wharf structures and
dredged slopes (e.g. as encountered in 2009 BH6) then excavation and removal or local ground improvement
will need to be considered.
The materials derived from dredging and their suitability for use within the reclamation, and the associated
ground improvement required, will be dependent on the method of dredging, the method and distance of
material transport and placement, soil grading, soil strength, breakdown during excavation and transportation,
and location (above or below water) and method of placement. Important drivers for dredging and reclamation
process and methodology are that the highest achievable fill quality is placed in the reclamation, and that
slurry/ fines are segregated into settling ponds and not entrapped in the reclamation fill.
Reclamation materials may include CSD dredge materials, BHD dredge materials, and/or materials sourced
from onshore or offshore borrow areas. Reclamation below water level is expected to include hydraulically
placed materials including fine sands and clay balls. Fine sand materials would be preferred in this zone with a
reduced preference for clay balls. Reclamation above water level is expected to include fine sands placed using
a discharge pipeline and/or clay blocks from BHD. Clay balls are not preferred in the above water reclamation
and should be excluded from above +1 or +2 mCD, unless positive support of port facilities such as piles, stone
columns, or semi rigid inclusions is to be provided. If positive support is to be considered, some form of
nominal surcharge or other ground improvement may still be required depending on the quality of the fill
materials as there is potential for significant settlement below the underside of a load transfer platform as a
result of the closure of inter-lump voids where reclamation materials include clay balls or clay lumps.
4.3 Use of clay ball and clay lump fills (Singapore Experience)
It is anticipated that the proposed dredging will generate variable materials, the nature of which will be
dependent on a number of factors as discussed in 4.2.
Based on the ground conditions in the port area, it is anticipated that dredging could generate the following
materials:
Large lumps (> 1 m3) of clayey sand and clay if dredged using mechanical dredging equipment
Small clay balls of variable size mixed with sand and slurry from CSD operations
Silty fine sand from CSD operations
Clay and silt slurry from CSD derived from fluidisation of clayey and silty sands, and the erosion and
breakdown of clay soils and clay balls as part of the CSD dredging and hydraulic transport processes
Ideally, fill for land reclamation, in particular fill placed in water, would comprise granular materials such as
sand and gravel, since they are relatively easily placed and improved by densification. However, if it is proposed
to use clay lumps and clay balls as reclamation fill, there are a number of important aspects that would need to
be considered as part of the design and construction process.
Clay balls and clay lumps are increasingly being used as reclamation fill in Singapore as local sources of sand fill
have been exhausted, and also due to the increasing cost of imported sand fill. This is of specific relevance to
the Port of Hastings site due to the presence of stiff clays in the dredge area and the lack of clean sand fill.
Land reclamation in Singapore started in the 19th century. Initially soils excavated from inland hills and sand
dredged from the surrounding seabed were used for reclamation. However, by the mid-1980s, the hill-cut soil
and local dredged sand suitable for reclamation were almost exhausted (Ministry of Communications and
Information, Singapore, 1986). Subsequent reclamations such as the Pulau Tekong Reclamation and the Tuas
Reclamation were carried out mainly by filling with imported sand. Areas of land reclamation and the types of
reclamation material are shown in Figure 4-1 and Figure 4-2. The increasing cost of imported sand and future
reclamations having to deal with increasing water depths, greater than 10 meters and often to a depth of 20
meters, has led to the need for alternative fill materials for use in future reclamation. This has included
reclamation using:
Layered sand and clay slurry derived from dredging of soft marine clays
Lumpy clay fill from mechanical grab dredging (> 1m3 lumps)
Clay balls from cutter suction dredging
Reclamation construction using the above material types has typically involved the construction of perimeter
bunds using sand fill to confine the reclamation.
Figure 4-2 Fill materials used in Singapore land reclamation projects (Ministry of Industry and communication, 1989)
Pre-load surcharge with vertical drains was commonly used for reclamations formed using dredged sand
materials placed over soft marine clays. For example at Pasir Panjang Terminals 1 and 2, 335 hectares of land
which was underlain by soft marine clay and reclaimed using 8-10m of imported sand was improved in the late
2000’s using vertical drains with fill surcharge.
Reclamation in Changi East involving the formation of 2000 Ha of land (Choa, 2000) using mostly hydraulically
placed marine sand, used prefabricated vertical drains combined with surcharge to accelerate the
consolidation settlement of the underlying soft compressible soil. Dynamic compaction, vibroflotation and
Muller resonance compaction (MRC) were used to densify the granular fill; dynamic compaction being
deployed where the depth of compaction was 5-7 m and vibroflotation and MRC methods where the required
depth of compaction was 7-10m.
Where clay lumps have been used as reclamation fill, large settlements have been observed upon application
of surcharge. This has been attributed to closing of inter-lump voids and plastic compression of the clay lumps
(Karthikeyan 2004). Investigation of a reclamation created using large clay lumps (Punggol Timor Island) was
undertaken 12 years after construction, to assess the present state of the reclaimed land with special emphasis
on identifying the size of current inter-lump voids. The reclamation contained up to 8m thickness of large clay
lumps overlain by 10m of sand fill. After 12 years the initially large inter lump voids were reduced to the size of
intra lump voids, however the layer formed from clay lumps was still heterogeneous with variable engineering
properties.
An overview of the factors affecting the nature and performance of lumpy clay and clay ball fill is given below,
based on recent experience in Singapore (Robinson, 2005; Alapakam, 2006).
The properties of clay lumps and clay balls can vary considerably, and are dependent on many factors including
initial soil strength and consistency, and moisture take up after dredging. Examples of clay lumps and clay balls
are given in Figure 4-3 to Figure 4-5.
Figure 4-4 Clay balls from Test Pit Excavations in the Old Tyabb Reclamation (Left)
Figure 4-5 Clay lumps dredged using large clamshell grab (Right)
For CSD dredging key factors influencing whether clay balls or slurry is produced, and resultant clay ball size,
include i) soil plasticity, where lower plasticity soils occur they tend to break down and form a slurry more so
than higher plasticity soils, ii) the size of the cutter head, and iii) the method and distance of transport whereby
clay balls tend to reduce in size and break down to a slurry as pumping/ pipeline lengths increase.
Compressibility and total settlement under external loading differs between clay slurry and mixtures of clay
slurry and clay balls or lumps as shown in Figure 4-6.
Figure 4-6 Compressibility curves in incremental tests (Mendoza and Hartlen, 1985)
Clay balls and clay lumps are characterised by a dual porosity or dual void ratio, comprising inter particle/lump
voids (i.e. voids between the clay lumps) and intra particle/lump voids within the clay matrix of individual clay
pieces. A schematic profile of land reclamation fill with clay lumps is given in Figure 4-7.
Figure 4-7 Schematic profile of land reclamation fill with clay lumps
Inter particle/lump voids are typically filled with slurry as shown in Figure 4-9 but may also be filled with water.
After dredging and placement in water, clay balls and clay lumps will swell. The swelling process is influenced
by the time delay between placement and subsequent ground improvement, and also the size of clay lumps or
clay balls due to the difference in ratio of surface area to volume of clay. Small clay balls soften relatively
quickly whereas softening of large clay lumps can take considerable time.
The swelling process results in reduction in strength of the clay material due to reduction in soil suction within
the clay matrix and increase in volume due to moisture uptake. Swelling of clay lumps can result in
disintegration of the clay and breakup of the material.
The rate of consolidation under external loading differs between non-swollen and swollen samples. Clays that
have been subject to swelling and strength reduction tend to initially consolidate faster and inter lump voids
close up at a lower applied load than for non-swollen materials.
The practical consequence of swell for large clay lumps when compared to smaller clay balls would be that clay
balls will swell relatively quickly and form a more homogenous fill than large clay lumps. Large clay lumps may
require high surcharge loads to eliminate inter lump voids, as larger stronger lumps would transfer load
through the intact clay matrix by arching rather than deforming to fill the voids.
If inter lump voids are not fully closed then the prediction of long term differential settlement becomes more
difficult. A ground improvement process that effectively closes the large voids and consolidates the softened
clay balls is therefore important to performance.
A common method of ground improvement of reclamation fill is to use preload surcharge. Vertical drains can
be used to accelerate the surcharge process since consolidation of lumpy clay fill and clay balls can slow
considerably once initial voids have closed up following loading.
Clay balls and clay lumps undergo significant and rapid initial settlement when initially loaded as inter particle
voids close up, after which the rate and magnitude of settlement reduces, and mass permeability is reduced.
Inter lump void ratio within a reclamation fill profile will vary with depth, as materials at greater depth are
subject to higher overburden pressure than shallower soils. Performance of clay ball or clay lump fill under pre-
load surcharge will therefore vary both with time and with depth.
The pressure required to close up inter particle voids depends on soil strength of the parent material, and the
level of swell. For softened clay balls pressure to close up inter particle voids can be in the order of 25 to 50
kPa, whereas for stronger lumps of clay surcharge pressure of over 100 kPa may be required.
Clay balls tend to provide a more homogenous fill once surcharged due to more uniform initial packing of the
clay balls.
Typical test result curves which demonstrate initial rapid consolidation and reduction in void ratio due to
closing up of inter lump voids are given in Figure 4-10. Rapid decreases in permeability with increasing
consolidation pressure are also illustrated in Figure 4-10. The apparatus used for one-dimensional
consolidation tests of lumpy clay and lumpy fill under a range of consolidation pressures is given in Figure 4-11
(Alapakam, 2006).
Figure 4-10 Typical e-log p and permeability curves for lumpy fill consolidation experiments
Strength profiles from cone tests on consolidated clay lumps indicate variable shear strength at low
consolidation pressures (overburden of 50 and 100 kPa), becoming more uniform at higher consolidation
pressures as can be seen in Figure 4-12. The practical consequence of this is that shear strength of clays subject
to typical levels of preload surcharge (< 100 kPa) would be variable, and the strength would still be relatively
low. This would mean that a significant thickness of engineered fill would need to be provided above pre-load
surcharged lumpy clay, to provide suitable support and adequate bearing capacity for subsequent use, in a
similar manner to what would be required to support surface loading on pre-load surcharged normally
consolidated marine clays.
Figure 4-12 Shear strength profiles obtained from cone penetration tests for lumpy clay
Pumping through a spreader or diffuser at the end of Placement of mechanically dredged materials by truck
a discharge pipeline from a CSD and / or TSHD or other means, followed by spreading and compaction
Dumping by barge or placing by grab Placement of land sourced borrow materials by truck or
other means followed by spreading and compaction
Table 4-2 Reclamation materials and potential use and placement method
Differential gradient between RTG Beams 1.5% with maximum differential along beams of 1:200
ISO 12488 (Cranes - Tolerances for wheels and travel and traversing tracks) - ASC rail tolerance (trigger for
maintenance)
Description Class 3 Class 4
Rail Gauge +/- 28 mm +/- 43 mm
Horizontal Straightness +/- 40 mm +/- 80 mm
Differential Settlement +/- 40 mm +/- 80 mm
Table 5-2 ASC Rail Tolerance
It is noted that the in situ Baxter Formation soils beneath the port area are generally relatively competent.
Extensive ground improvement of these materials is unlikely to be required. However, local lower strength
strata have been identified within the Baxter Formation at some locations, which if present beneath perimeter
bunds, or at locations of critical or settlement sensitive structures, may mean that some form of ground
improvement is required.
drain installation to speed the pre-load surcharge process, depending on time available and actual rate of the
consolidation.
Figure 6-2 Drain Installation on land and extracted pore water escaping at top of drain (Hydraulic Fill Manual 2012)
Figure 6-5 Vacuum consolidation at Port of Brisbane, 1.5 Ha trial (left), 9.3 Ha production area (right) (Menard Bachy)
6.5 Vibroflotation
Vibroflotation or vibrocompaction involves the use of a vibrating probe that can penetrate granular soil to
depths of over 30 metres (see Figure 6-6 – Schematic of vibroreplacement process). The vibrations of the
probe cause the grain structure to collapse thereby densifying the soil surrounding the probe. In order to
effectively treat and densify a loose soil, the vibroflot is raised and lowered in a grid pattern.
Vibroreplacement is a combination of vibroflotation with the introduction of a gravel backfill, resulting in stone
columns, or sand backfill resulting in sand columns. This increases the amount of densification, provides a
degree of reinforcement to weaker soils, and can potentially provide an effective means of drainage.
Vibroreplacement can also be used to improve the strength of softer cohesive materials whereby granular
columns are installed at suitably close centres to reinforce these materials. This method is not suited in very
soft soils which have a very low undrained shear strength since the lateral support for the stone columns may
be insufficient.
The range of soils for which the vibroflotation method is suitable is given in Figure 6-7 which indicates
performance in medium and coarse sand and fine and medium gravel deposits. However, vibroflotation may
not be suitable in fine sands and in soils with more than 10 to 20% silt and clay content. Since granular Baxter
Formation soils comprise fine sands, often with a relatively high fines content, depending on the resultant
particle size distribution after reclamation filling, the ability to densify reclamation sands derived from the
Baxter Formation using vibroflotation may be marginal.
In circumstances where imported granular fills are to be considered for the Hastings project, such as for
perimeter bunds, or as general reclamation fill, then depending on the particle size distribution of the materials
vibrocompaction may be an appropriate method of densifying loose sands.
High performance areas (around quay structures) of the 60 hectare reclamation completed as part of the Port
Botany expansion were treated using land and marine based vibrocompaction methods.
order of 5 to 10 m in granular soils, up to around 5 m in cohesive soils, but may be ineffective in very soft and
soft clays.
Dynamic compaction could be suitable for densification and compaction of dredged granular materials in the
main reclamation area, and (possibly in conjunction with dynamic replacement techniques) the existing fills in
the Old Tyabb reclamation and the underlying loose intertidal sediments. However, dynamic compaction may
not be fully effective in improving fills and sediments where they have significant clay content, particularly at
depth.
Dynamic compaction was also used to improve areas of the Port Botany reclamation using a 25t dynamic
compaction weight dropped from a height of 23m.
Figure 6-9 Offshore dynamic compaction and replacement in Singapore - Pasir Panjang Terminal 3 & 4 at 30m below water (Menard)
Deep soil mixing could be suitable for improvement of dredged materials in the main reclamation area, existing
reclamation fills in the Old Tyabb reclamation and possibly the underlying loose intertidal sediments.
Deep soil mixing has the benefit of not extracting soils, however depending on the adopted method some spoil
may be generated during the mixing process which would need to be disposed of. This method can comprise
single columns or multiple installations forming walls, blocks, or grids to improve the ground and support
specific facilities as illustrated in Figure 6-11. Depending on the column patterns a load transfer platform may
be required at surface to transfer load to the columns using crushed rock and high strength geotextile or
geogrid.
Deep soil mixing could be suitable for improvement for a number of applications including improvement of
dredged materials in the main reclamation area, providing soil reinforcement behind wharf structures, and for
improvement of the existing reclamation fills and underlying loose sediments in the Old Tyabb reclamation.
Figure 6-11 Examples of deep soil mixing equipment and column patterns
string where it emerges though a very small diameter orifice, converting the energy from high pressure to very
high velocity. To form columns of treated ground, the drill string is rotated as the hydrodynamic jet of grout
erodes and disintegrates the soil and mixes into it.
The soil type and stratigraphy influence the quality of the grouted soil column (soilcrete) and the geometry of
erosion. Cohesionless soils are readily eroded with this method. However for cohesive soils, as plasticity and
stiffness increase, erodibility decreases to a point where jet grouting may not effectively erode stiff cohesive
soils (Kirsch and Bell, 2013). Stratification and variable soil conditions can lead to variable soilcrete quality.
The installation process for jet grouted columns, range of applicable soil types and indicative strength are given
in Figure 6-12.
Figure 6-12 Installation process for jet grouted columns, range of applicable soil types and indicative strength (Menard Bachy)
Figure 6-14 - High Energy Impact Rolling using a 3 sided roller (LandPac)
2 Displacement or mud-waving Cost-effective alternative to excavation and replacement Requires disposal of unsuitable materials Suitable for very soft recently flocculated marine clay/ muds with careful
management
No additional ground improvement required if mud wave Requires relatively high differential fill level to displace other
removed or located outside work area than surficial very soft recent marine muds. May not be Not recommended in settlement sensitive or in critical areas due to high
effective in hydraulically placed sands risk of entrapment of unsuitable materials
No ongoing creep settlement (assuming all unsuitable
materials are removed) Risk of unsuitable materials becoming entrapped beneath or
within the reclamation fill
Risk that unsuitable materials are only partially displaced – full
depth of material not displaced
May need to undertake ground improvement of residual weak
soils
Difficult to monitor and verify during filling operations
3 Preload surcharge Rapid settlement in granular materials Slow settlement where fill is placed over soft clays or where fill Only suitable for densification and compaction of sands placed over the
includes cohesive materials main reclamation area. Dredged materials are expected to comprise
clayey sand and clay and silt materials – therefore not considered suitable
Surcharge required to be in place for several months. Without
without vertical drains
improved drainage surcharge may need to be in place for many
years in cohesive soils (Not suitable for hydraulically placed sand in perimeter bund/ seawall
unless reclamation extended offshore and then trimmed back)
Surcharge loading may result in edge instability
Requires fill source for pre-load surcharge
4 Preload surcharge with vertical Rate of consolidation can be rapidly accelerated - decreases Requires specialist equipment for installation of vertical drains Suitable for improvement of dredged materials placed over main
drains overall time required for primary consolidation in cohesive reclamation area, and lower soft / loose fills in Old Tyabb reclamation
Requires stable platform for installation equipment
soils compared to preload surcharge
Surcharge loading may result in edge instability
Relatively low cost to install drains
May take 6 to 12 months for settlement to occur
Requires fill source for pre-load surcharge
5 Vacuum consolidation Does not require temporary surcharge materials Maximum theoretical preload is 100kPa- actual preload is May not be suitable due to the difficultly associated with forming an
limited to around 70 to 80kPa effective seal in Baxter Formation materials
Shorter construction period compared to other preload
methods Difficult to form an effective seal in sandy soils – requires
extensive cut-off walls into non-permeable layers
Exerts an isotropic load without introducing shear stresses in
the subsoil and therefore does not affect the stability of soft May be difficult to seal permeable base
strata
6 Vibroflotation or Can penetrate granular soils to depths of 30m Not suitable for use in fine sands and soils containing more than Suitable for densification and compaction of sands placed over main
vibrocompaction 10-20% fines content reclamation platform, hydraulically placed sand in perimeter bund /
Cost-effective alternative to other ground improvement
seawall (over water operation)
techniques for granular soils Requires a stable working platform
For reclamation platform effectiveness may be limited/marginal due to
Effective above and below water level Requires specialist equipment– high mobilisation costs
the high fines content of Baxter Formation soils
Can be completed using land or water based equipment Not suitable for cohesive soils
7 Vibroreplacement - Stone Can penetrate granular soils to depths of 30m Not suited to very soft soils which cannot provide sufficient Suitable for improvement of soft clays and loose sands soils beneath
columns or sand columns
Port of Hastings Container Expansion – Design & Engineering
Dredging and Reclamation – Ground Improvement
27-Feb-15 37
DRAFT
8 Dynamic compaction Uses standard construction equipment Effective depth limited to 5-10m in granular soils and around 5m Suitable for improvement of dredged granular soils in areas of limited
in cohesive soils reclamation fill thickness
Economical
May be ineffective in very soft and soft soils, or soils with Possible use to improve the existing fills in the Old Tyabb reclamation and
High production rate compared to other ground
significant clay content underlying loose intertidal sediments, although may need addition of
improvement techniques
granular fill i.e. dynamic replacement
Requires a stable working platform
High energy and vibrations may have impact on nearby
structures The surface of the soil may require shallow compaction with
possible addition of granular fill following dynamic compaction
9 Dynamic replacement Can be used in stratified soils including very soft to soft soils Effective depth limited to 5-10m in granular soils and around 5m Suitable for improvement of shallow cohesive soils such as the Old Tyabb
in cohesive soils reclamation and areas with limited reclamation fill thickness
High production rate compared to other ground
improvement techniques Requires a stable working platform
High energy and vibrations may have impact on nearby
structures
10 Deep Soil Mixing Applicable up to depths of 50m Requires specialist equipment – high mobilisation costs for Suitable for improvement of dredged materials in the main reclamation
mixing and batching equipment and existing reclamation fills in the Old Tyabb reclamation and the
Can be used in stratified soils including very soft to soft soils
underlying loose intertidal sediments
Dense cohesionless soils can be difficult to penetrate
Spacing and patterns of DSM elements highly flexible,
May be suitable for ground improvement of perimeter bunds or fill in
arrangements tailored to specific needs May generate significant volume of spoil depending on mixing
close proximity to structures
method (wet method)
High productivity usually possible (hence, economical) for
large-scale projects Requires a stable working platform - weight of the equipment
may be problematic for weak soils (depending on the method)
Engineering properties of treated soil can be closely
designed Limited ability to treat isolated strata at depth
Causes minimal lateral or vertical stress that could
potentially damage adjacent structures
No vibration, medium-low noise
May generate very low volume of spoil (dry method,
trenchers)
Quality of treatment verifiable during construction
11 Jet grouting Can be used in stratified soils including very soft to soft soils Effective depth limited to 15-20m Possibly suitable for local areas of ground improvement but other
methods likely to be more suited for large areas of ground improvement.
Spacing and patterns of grouted elements highly flexible, Requires specialist equipment – high mobilisation costs for
arrangements tailored to specific needs mixing and batching equipment
Engineering properties of treated soil can be closely
designed
12 Semi rigid inclusions Applicable up to depths of around 35m Requires specialist equipment – high mobilisation costs for Suitable for improvement of dredged materials in the main reclamation
mixing and batching equipment and existing reclamation fills in the Old Tyabb reclamation and possibly
Can be used in stratified soils including very soft to soft soils
the underlying loose intertidal sediment.
Requires a stable working platform
Displacement technique generates very little spoil
Spacing and patterns of semi rigid inclusions is highly
flexible, arrangements tailored to specific needs
Engineering properties of semi rigid inclusions can be closely
Port of Hastings Container Expansion – Design & Engineering
Dredging and Reclamation – Ground Improvement
27-Feb-15 38
DRAFT
13 Impact Rolling Can improve ground to a greater depth than compaction Depth of influence limited to a maximum of around 4m but Suitable for compaction of shallow sand placed over main reclamation
with conventional earthworks equipment more typically around 2m platform, and for surface preparation of near surface fill in Old Tyabb
reclamation
Unsuitable for soft soils
May be used in conjunction with other methods
Unsuitable for deeper uncontrolled fills
14 Deep foundations or piling Applicable up to depths of around 50m Potential differential settlement between piled and non-piled Suitable for supporting facilities on dredged materials in the main
areas reclamation and existing reclamation fills in the Old Tyabb reclamation.
Can be used in stratified soils including very soft to soft soils
However likely to be expensive compared to other options
Not expected to be economical over large areas compared to
Uses common design and construction methods and
other methods
equipment
Limited flexibility to accommodate future changes to layout,
Engineering properties of piled foundations can be closely
loading use
designed
Spacing and patterns of piles is highly flexible, and allows
arrangements to be tailored to specific needs
Pile set out can be varied to suit ground conditions and
loading requirements
Can achieve high load capacity
Ground improvement techniques that are likely to be most suited to the Port of Hastings site are given below.
Selection of ground improvement techniques will depend on ground conditions, design and performance
requirements, time available, cost of ground improvement works, environmental considerations, and the type
of structure of facilities being constructed.
Preload surcharge with or without vertical drains
Vibrocompaction
Vibroreplacement
Dynamic replacement
Semi rigid inclusions
Deep foundations or piling.
Possible ground improvement techniques are given in Table 7-2 for containment bunds and the main
reclamation fills, for a range of dredged material types and placement scenarios. It is expected that
containment bunds will be required to i) contain the reclamation fill and suspended solids within the footprint
of the reclamation area and settling ponds, ii) to control water within the reclamation area; and iii) to control
the flow of the discharge water in the fill area. Containment bunds may be constructed using imported sand or
imported quarry product and are expected to require ground improvement. The geometry of bunded areas
will need to accommodate the footprint of the main reclamation and associated lagoons and settlement ponds.
Bund walls may include external perimeter bunds with appropriate protection from wave action (which may
form part of the permanent works) and internal/secondary bunds walls.
Possible Ground Improvement
Area Scenario
Techniques
Containment Soft clays removed prior to reclamation - Preload surcharge (requires over
Bunds reclamation)
- Vibrocompaction of sand fill
(extended beneath bund to
support structures as required)
Main Fine sand and clay balls placed hydraulically below - Preload surcharge with or without
Reclamation water, hydraulically placed sand fill above water. vertical drains (drains required
depending on mass permeability
Very soft marine clays and slurry removed of compressed clay ball fill)
- Vibroreplacement
- Semi rigid inclusions
- Deep foundations or piling
Main Fine sand and clay balls hydraulically placed below - Preload surcharge with or without
Reclamation water, fill from BHD or land source spread and vertical drains (drains required
compacted using terrestrial earthworks equipment depending on mass permeability
above water. of compressed clay ball fill)
- Vibroreplacement
Very soft marine clays and slurry removed - Semi rigid inclusions
- Deep foundations or piling
Preload surcharge with Old Tyabb reclamation Vertical drains - 1.2 m centres on a
vertical drains triangular grid to 9 m depth
Soil Mixing Old Tyabb reclamation Bulk soil mixing up to 7m depth completed
in two lifts
Table 7-3 Ground improvement techniques costed by Menard Bachy
Stage 1 would comprise preparation of the seabed along the alignment of the seaward perimeter bund. This
would include removal of recent very soft and soft marine clays. Depending on the wharf type option selected
and specific ground conditions at the wharf line, additional excavation may be required to remove unsuitable
founding materials that may compromise seawall stability, and wharf and reclamation performance. Excavation
and replacement and/ or ground improvement along the seaward perimeter of the outer bund would need to
take into account final dredge levels.
Stage 2 would involve initial placement of sand fill or quarry fill to form a perimeter bund. In view of the
variable and often high fines content of natural in situ soils in the immediate port area, dredged materials are
unlikely to be suitable for bund construction. Suitable granular fill would therefore need to be obtained from
appropriate borrow sources, such as offshore borrow areas or from suitable quarry sources. In order to isolate
the bunded reclamation area prior to Stage 3 placement of general reclamation fills, it is anticipated that the
bund may need to be extended above high tide to isolate the reclamation area from the open sea prior to
reclamation filling. Armoured revetment (temporary or permanent) would be required to protect the seaward
face of the perimeter bund.
Stage 3 would comprise placement of dredged materials in the main reclamation area. The reclamation process
would need to be managed and sequenced so that higher quality fills are placed into the main reclamation, and
fluidised clay and silt slurry are removed and placed into settlement ponds/ process water system. If very soft
near surface sediments are left in place in the reclamation area, and become displaced by the reclamation
process, these should be removed along with the dredge fluidised slurry.
It is anticipated that the reclamation fills resulting from CSD operations would comprise fine and medium
sands, and clay balls.
Stage 4 would involve filling to above water level which again would comprise placement of sand and clay balls.
Preference should be given to the use of sand where possible, and if practical using a selective dredging
process.
Stage 5 would involve placement of better quality fill above water to form a 3 to 4 m thick support zone of
future pavements and container handing equipment. Better quality fill would comprise either dredged sand
which could be later densified (with silt and clay slurry decanted into settlement ponds), or competent
clay/sand/clayey sand fill derived from mechanical dredging of the Baxter and Sherwood Formation soils,
moisture conditioned, spread, and compacted in layers using conventional terrestrial earthworks equipment.
General earthfill derived from on shore borrow sources could also be used. It is noted that the use of clay balls
in the upper layers of reclamation fill (above say + 1 to +2 mCD) should be avoided unless positive ground
improvement such as CMCs, stone columns, and/ or piles (all with load transfer platform) is to be adopted.
Ground improvement of the perimeter bund may be completed using floating plant where the bund is to form
part of the permanent works.
Following completion of reclamation ground improvement would be undertaken during Stages 6 and 7. This
may include ground improvement of both the perimeter bund and the main reclamation areas. The following
example methods of ground improvement could be considered for the Port of Hastings site:
Vibrocompaction of the perimeter bund to densify the sand fill.
Depending on wharf option(s) adopted and the location of the quay line, it may be necessary to densify
soils along the outer perimeter of the bund which may involve the use of floating plant, or overfilling of
the bund and trimming back once vibrocompaction is complete.
Depending on wharf option(s) adopted, it may be necessary to extend the vibroflot below the initial depth
of trench excavation undertaken in Stage 1 so as to strengthen founding soils by vibro replacement. This
may comprise the installation of sand or stone columns below the Stage 1 dredge depth.
For the main reclamation area preload surcharge of sand fill and clay balls could be undertaken (not
shown). The level required for pre-load would be dependent on final design loading and performance
requirements. It is likely that preload surcharge may be in the order of 80 to 100 kPa (4 to 6 m of fill
depending on fill type and bulk density).
Although clay balls may have an initial high permeability, the consolidation process can significantly
reduce permeability with time as the clay balls are squashed and inter lump voids are closed. Vertical
drains may therefore need to be installed to speed up the consolidation process where reclamation has
been undertaken using clay balls, or where in situ soft clays are left in place. Once the preload surcharge
fill is in place, a consolidation phase of say 6 to 12 months may be expected. In order to reduce surcharge
fill volumes a rolling surcharge may be used.
Although it is common to place surcharge fill without compaction, it is noted that if surcharge is to
comprise clay fill which is to be re-used, the surcharge will need to be managed and surfaces sealed so
that the fill does not deteriorate and soften due to moisture ingress.
As an alternative to preload surcharge, a method of positive ground improvement using semi rigid
inclusions (CMCs) with load transfer platform could be considered. This would need to be designed to
reduce loading onto the unconsolidated reclamation fills i.e. by fully supporting subsequent port facilities
and container handling operations.
It is noted that it would be necessary to complete ground improvement in the in vicinity of wharf structures
prior to installation of the wharf so that structural members do not become damaged or displaced by the
ground improvement process.
It is also noted that the above ground improvement scenarios are not exclusive, and alternative methods of
ground improvement could be considered, for example deep soil mixing, extensive stone columns installation,
the installation of piles, or possibly the use of dynamic compaction and dynamic replacement in areas of
shallow reclamation filling.
10.0 Conclusions
This report provides an overview of potential ground improvement options applicable to the Port of Hastings
considering existing ground conditions, the possible dredging and reclamation work methods, and staging and
sequencing considerations.
It is assumed that the bulk of dredging works will be undertaken using CSD and/ or backhoe techniques and
that the overall reclamation footprint will include discrete reclamation areas which will support staged
expansion of the port. Dredged material for reclamation will need to be placed in areas contained within bund
walls which will need to be constructed prior to the commencement of reclamation works, most likely using
imported granular fill or other suitable materials.
The materials derived from dredging and their suitability for use within the reclamation, and the associated
ground improvement required, will be dependent on the method of dredging, soil grading, soil strength, soil
breakdown during excavation and transportation, and method of placement. Important drivers for dredging
and reclamation process/methodology are that the highest achievable fill quality is placed in the reclamation,
and that slurry/ fines are segregated into settling ponds and not entrapped in the reclamation fill.
Reclamation materials may include CSD dredge materials, BHD dredge materials, and/or materials sourced
from onshore or offshore borrow areas. Reclamation below water level is expected to include hydraulically
placed materials including fine sands and clay balls. Fine sand materials are preferred in this zone with a
reduced preference for clay balls. Reclamation above water level is expected to include fine sands placed using
a discharge pipeline and/or clay blocks from BHD, spread and compacted using conventional terrestrial
earthworks equipment.
There are several factors affecting the nature and performance of lumpy clay fill and clay balls which will need
to be considered in in the dredging and reclamation design. These relate to the composition of the reclamation
material, which may include sand, and clay/ silt slurry mixed with clay balls of varying size. These factors
include the dual porosity associated with inter lump and intra lump voids and the effects of swelling of clay
lumps or balls, and the need to close up inter lump voids.
Following reclamation it is anticipated that ground improvement works will need to be undertaken to provide
adequate support for structures, reduce post construction settlement, and mitigate against liquefaction.
Ground improvement strategies will vary across the terminal area and are expected to be a function of the
foundation and reclamation materials and the operational requirements of each area.
Methods of ground improvement that may be appropriate for the proposed site include:
Excavation and replacement
Displacement or mud-waving
Preload surcharge with or without vertical drains
Vacuum consolidation
Vibroflotation or vibrocompaction
Vibroreplacement - stone columns or sand columns
Dynamic compaction
Dynamic replacement
Deep soil mixing
Jet grouting
Semi rigid inclusions
Impact rolling
Deep foundations or piling.
Ground improvement techniques considered to be most suited to the Port of Hastings site include the
following:
Preload with or without vertical drains
Vibrocompaction
Vibroreplacement
Dynamic replacement
Semi rigid inclusions
Deep foundations or piling.
The selection of ground improvement techniques will depend on the on ground conditions, design and
performance requirements, time available, cost of ground improvement works, environmental considerations,
and the type of structure of facilities being constructed.
References
Alapakam. “Characterization of Lumpy Fill in Land Reclamation” National University of Singapore, (2006)
Choa, V., M. W. Bo, and J. Chu. "Soil improvement works for Changi East reclamation project." Proceedings of
the ICE-Ground Improvement 5, no. 4 (2001): 141-153.
Chua, Lai, Hoffman, and Hawkins. “Ground Improvement Using Dynamic Replacement for NCIG CET3 Coal
Stockyard” Australian Geomechanics Vol 43, No 3, (2008): 63-74.
Haskoning Australia. “Port of Hastings Development Project –Dredged Materials Management Ground
Treatment Options” February 2015
Hawkins, Chua and Niu. “NCIG CET3 Project – A geotechnical Perspective” Australian Geomechanics Vol 43, No
3, (2008): 53-62.
Indraratna, Buddhima, Rujikiatkamjorn, Ameratunga, and Boyle. "Performance and prediction of vacuum
combined surcharge consolidation at Port of Brisbane." Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental
Engineering 137, No. 11 (2011): 1009-1018.
Jones. “The Design and Performance of Stone Columns at Kooragang Coal Terminal” Australian Geomechanics
Vol 43, No 3, (2008): 43-52.
Karthikeyan, Muthusamy, Ganeswara Rao Dasari, and Thiam-Soon Tan. "In situ characterization of land
reclaimed using big clay lumps." Canadian geotechnical journal 41, No. 2 (2004): 242-256.
Robinson, Tan, Dasari, Leung, and Vijayakumar. "Experimental study of the behaviour of a lumpy fill of soft
clay." International Journal of Geomechanics Vol 5, No. 2 (2005): 125-137.
van't Hoff, Jan, and Art Nooy van der Kolff, eds. “Hydraulic Fill Manual: For Dredging and Reclamation Works”
Vol. 244. CRC press, 2012.
Wong, Patrick K. "Ground Improvement Case Studies Chemical Lime Piles and Dynamic Replacement."
Australian Geomechanics Society Jnl 39, no. 2 (2004).